Slashdot Mirror
RIM Co-CEO Cries 'No Fair' On Security Question
bulled writes "When asked about letting governments in Asia and the Middle East into the 'secure' message service used by their BlackBerry devices, Mike Lazaridis, the co-chief executive of RIM, walked out of the interview and said, 'We've dealt with this, the question is no fair.' By 'dealt with,' we can only assume he meant: 'been paid handsomely to let governments read what they wish.'"
It's your right to walk away from an interview at any time. There's not even anything wrong with it unless you've specifically promised to answer all questions.
However, this was still pretty rude and even silly of him. Some choice information-poor statements would probably have been much more effective than this - now it's been on the Slashdot and more importantly on the BBC News front page. He could just as well have said "we're doing something shady you don't like."
"It is not fair to ask us why we are putting our profits ahead of our customers' security needs."
Palm trees and 8
I think we can safely assume that Blackberry is about as secure as a wet paper bag in countries where the device has become "commercially successful" and the government is less than interested in maintaining privacy.
Mentioining "national security" at the end of the video is a clear sign that RIM has well and truly given in on their claims of absolute security for the sake of maintaining a moderately-successful business.
Never trust the security of communications where the keys are being handled by someone outside your organisation.
whats not fair is RIM backdooring their product to appease third word oppressive regimes.
You can't advertise a service or a device as being secure, and then sell the keys to the locks to the highest bidder. Fuck RIM. I hope they burn. My wife wanted a blackberry on this last go round of upgrades. Nope.
Some questions really arent fair. Yes or No questions that imply things, for instance.
Were you raping that underage transvestite midget crack whore last night?
So you are saying that it wasnt rape.
"His name was James Damore."
Disclaimer: I'm Canadian but I own an iPhone, not a Blackberry. I saw the clip previously and didn't even know what he was talking about, and just thought it was exceptionally bad manners to walk out of a BBC interview. Now that I know that the question was about allowing foreign governments spy on foreign citizens, I find his response even more rude. Answer the damn question, man. If you are ashamed of what your company is doing then maybe you should find another job.
Well, sure. You have the right to walk away anytime. You have the right to walk out of class, out of work; unless you're in prison or the military, you always have the right to walk away.
But how can he not anticipate this question? Its been the number 1 question of RIM for the last 24 months, and he thinks its *unfair* he was asked about it?
He's either naive or an idiot. In either case, he was unprepared for an interview if he wasn't ready to talk about RIM's #1 issue.
If I was a major shareholder, he wouldn't impress me.
The RIM CEO called an end to an interview when he realized (after a minute and a half) that he was just being ambushed with a combative line of questioning. The interviewer had no interest in him answering the questions, he just wanted to make the CEO look bad in order to get ratings. This is, unfortunately or fortunately, rather common in british television. But in this case, it does seem genuinely unfair.
The interviewer knows that governments demand access to people's communications. All American telcos give call logs and e-mail histories pretty regularly to the government. Same with British ones. In this case, *we* don't trust the Saudi's with our communications, yet we somehow trust the US government with them.
Blackberry spent a lot of money building up a successful business in the middle east. Then they had to take their entire business offline while they added these backdoors for the government. When the king holds your entire business for ransom, with the requirement that you do for them what you do for every other government out there, you do it. Whining and complaining about RIM's "security problems" is just childish. And ambushing the CEO on film in an attack segment to make him look bad for something that he, and everyone else was forced to do, is definitely not fair.
The ______ Agenda
It's your right to walk away from an interview at any time.
True. However if you are the CEO of a major international corporation and you cannot handle a reasonable, politely asked question from a major international media organization you are in the wrong job.
When the king holds your entire business for ransom, with the requirement that you do for them what you do for every other government out there, you do it. Whining and complaining about RIM's "security problems" is just childish.
what the fuck does the above even BEGIN to mean ?
so, if a king holds your business ransom, you can do ANYthing, and its ok, and those who question unethical doings, are 'childish' ?
'whine' word usage is attention-catching there. so, now when someone complains about unethical dealings of a 'business', it becomes a whine ?
what kind of fucked up reasoning is that ?
really. are you a fucking moron, or a troll ?
no, no, dont excuse the rough language. since you shattered the barrier to ethics on grounds of 'business needs', i had had taken the liberty of shattering the barrier to ethics of civil correspondence, on a random ground of my choosing.
Read radical news here
In this case, people aren't angry by the fact that RIM chose (it's a choice; the other option is to cease doing business in the respective countries) to cooperate with authoritarian regimes, but rather by the fact that their CEO does not, apparently, have the balls to admit that they do, and just cries "unfair!" when asked a straightforward question.
No, it's like you sell bananas, but the USA says you can't anymore unless you can tell the government how to remove the skin without the end user knowing. You damage the brand and the business model (security) by caving in.
Instead of walking out, he could have replied with a "no comment" or "I've addressed that question already" and ask to move on. The Co-CEO got very defensive and ended the interview. If you're the head of a major corporation, you're going to have to field tough questions at times. Some of them might not be fair. But that's why they are supposed to get the big bucks.
Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.